Because a lottery ticket is like one damned dollar and probably the cheapest form of entertainment on the planet, so it's exactly the kind of thing you do for entertainment when you don't have money?

lymond01:Meanwhile the mother has to pay all the bills herself or accept welfare when she may not need to if her baby daddy would contribute. Stuff happens, sure, but I hope he puts the kid and the mothet through life with his winnings otherwise I'm on subby's side.

Yeah, because his lack of custody is totally willing and not the result of an absurdy misandrist set of laws and traditions governing divorce proceedings in the US or anything.

kronicfeld:Slaxl: what_now: sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

Perhaps he doesn't have any money?

Maybe, but if he has no money and didn't move for a reduction then he has no one but himself to blame. And of course if he has no money through his own fault, then that's no excuse.

It's not always that easy. I got behind by around 12k. See I was living in NJ while my case is in NC. I was very sick. So sick I needed a liver transplant. I could not work and I damn sure was in no shape to make the trip to NC. Not working meant I could not afford a lawyer to handle the case for me. The arrears just kept ticking up, up and away. The next time we went to court for an adjustment I had all the proof I needed to show I was a)incapable of working b)incapable of going to court for a reduction. None of that mattered. The only person that can forgive that debt is my twat of an ex and she never will.

lymond01:sammyk: Slaxl: what_now: sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

Perhaps he doesn't have any money?

I wonder if maybe there was some sort of economic factor beyond his control. Something like a worldwide recession and unprecedented high unemployment.

Meanwhile the mother has to pay all the bills herself or accept welfare when she may not need to if her baby daddy would contribute. Stuff happens, sure, but I hope he puts the kid and the mothet through life with his winnings otherwise I'm on subby's side.

Why should he pay a dime more than he owes? And why the fark would anyone be expected to support an ex? If dude wanted to pay that biatches way he wouldn't have kicked her to the curb in the first place.

what_now:sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

I didn't pay any from 2003 to 2009, because I was not employed, yet the court refused to reduce my payment, which was based on my high water earnings at my previous employer .. so, the last 3 years I was there, I wasn't able to foot the bill, as my earnings had gone down (but the court argued that since I was still at the same job, I should be still making the same amount of money .. irrelevant to the fact that on that high water year they measured by, I had set virtually every sales and profit record in the company, so the vast majority of my income was "bonus"), by the time I was no longer employed there, I owed 4k, and by the time I was re-employed, it was up to 20k.

Of course, during this whole time I was unemployed, the child's mother also was unemployed, so therefore, I was expected to foot her part of everything, as well. Which is pretty damn difficult with -0- income.

Sooooooooooooooooo..... yeah, child support courts can be really difficult to work with.

I said in the gas-tax thread, our tax system is overly complicated and contentious because everything has to "make sense" and people don't have any sense. State needs $X to do what citizens want it to do. Tax everyone's income progressively and be done with it. If you want something for your taxes that go to CSE, make a baby, get divorced and get custody.

It isn't so much the little bit they skim off of the top (but that's a decent chunk of change too), but when you add in the federal dollars that come in to the state collection agencies, which is based on how much they collect every year, you can see where the state has an interest in being involved in every single case where child support is ordered, whether they need to be an intermediary or not. It is to the point now where in a lot of states, if a divorce happens, there is no option to directly pay the support to the custodial parent...you HAVE to send it to the state for redistribution (with a delay of a week or so). That way the state can say they collected $X00 million in child support, and get their funding from the feds for doing work that in a lot of cases didn't need to be done in the first place.

Right. Cops get funding for doing work that in a lot of cases didn't need to be done in the first place.

This chart is based on 2000 data. It's old, but that was a better time than today so I imagine the situation was a bit rosier for obligees. "57 percent of the obligors in the nine study states owed $5,000 in arrears or less." So 43% owed more than $5K. Yeah, I'd make everybody go through the Family Support Registry.

The arrears couldn't possibly be because of unrealistic payment expectations and tacked on interest and fees. Of course, to the state, the higher the better because they make more money.

Your analogy of the cops is poor. They make bank all of the time off of asset forfeiture, often with no evidence of drugs OR crime.

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: I hate the idea that If my wife and I were to split and satisfactorily work everything out between us in terms of support and custody that the state would still get involved against our wishes to pay for an unneeded child advocate and services we didn't want or need.

You hate the fact that the state doesn't trust divorcing parents to act in the best interests of their children. I take comfort in the fact that the state protects children's interests. Apparently, in WV children need more protection than they do elsewhere.

Jury is back in. You are just being a prick.

Making the system mandatory for all divorce cases with kids is BS, an overreach of the state and inflexible.

It is like mandatory minimum sentencing. It screws everybody the same even though the offenses may vary. Why even bother with the judge? You could get the same result with a payment table.

If you think it isn't about the money you aren't familiar with WV state government.

You GOTTA be a lawyer. No one else would suck the cock of the legal system as hard as you do.

ongbok:I have a friend who was 35k in arrearages before his daughter was 6 months old.

How did that happen you ask. Well when his daughter was born he went and petitioned the state to set child support payments. When his daughter was about a month old she got an ear infection and had to be admitted to the hospital. He had health insurance for his daughter, but instead of using his health insurance his daughter's mother used her medicaid or medicare, what ever it is, card because his health insurance had a $75 copay and she didn't want to pay it. He didn't find out about this until 2 months later when they were at the child support hearing and they told him he had an arrearage of 35k. So I guess if the article was about him and it said that he owed child support of 35k - what ever he paid off, dating back to 2008, some of you would be screaming that he was a deadbeat also.

And for those of you saying that he should have asked for a reduction if he couldn't pay, the court doesn't automatically give out reductions. I know a few people that ask for reductions when they were laid off and couldn't find work, or found other jobs that paid far less than they were making before, and refused reductions and told to get two or three jobs if they had to.

Indeed, if I take my case to court, there's a significant chance that the judge will order me to get a second job, even though I'm meeting 100% of my child-support obligations, and about 60% of my spousal obligations. Which would be monumentally unfair, given that I already work full-time, and my ex refuses to work, even though she is doubly-qualified as a pharmacy technician, and even worked in that field until her skank lawyer advised her to stop.

The "system" isn't about fairness or taking care of people who need to be taken care of. It's about punishment. Reasonableness plays no part.

Meesterjojo:Further, until recently, the Texas OAG has yet to respond to two (2) certified letters stating that the mother refuses to uphold my visitation rights. She still violates them. I didn't see him but one (1) time until this January. The various Attorney General's offices only see males as Wallets. We're the wallets.

I don't know how it works in Texas, but where I live, it's the responsibility of the parent seeking visitation to file a motion to show cause to enforce visitation rights. Women, of course, get all the state help they need to collect their child support. But the state won't lift a finger to help a father see his child.

Has nobody read any other articles on this guy? His business burned down in 2009 and he lost his house because of it. That might have something to do with him missing child support payments. It doesn't mean he's not a bad person - he very well could be - but there's always more than meets the eye with this stuff.

And yeah, each of his non-custodial kids should be getting $1m trust funds and a healthy chunk of his inheritance.

the only recorded history, and you can discount it if you please, of somebody coming back from the grave was Lazarus. And, as far as we know, the first thing he did wasn't to try and mooch 20 shekels off of Jesus to pay off the bills that he racked up while dead. Think of just how amazing it would be if we actually used money for what it was designed to do.

sammyk:kronicfeld: Slaxl: what_now: sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

Perhaps he doesn't have any money?

Maybe, but if he has no money and didn't move for a reduction then he has no one but himself to blame. And of course if he has no money through his own fault, then that's no excuse.

It's not always that easy. I got behind by around 12k. See I was living in NJ while my case is in NC. I was very sick. So sick I needed a liver transplant. I could not work and I damn sure was in no shape to make the trip to NC. Not working meant I could not afford a lawyer to handle the case for me. The arrears just kept ticking up, up and away. The next time we went to court for an adjustment I had all the proof I needed to show I was a)incapable of working b)incapable of going to court for a reduction. None of that mattered. The only person that can forgive that debt is my twat of an ex and she never will.

DON'T STICK YOUR DICK IN CRAZY ...

It's amazing to me how many guys biatch about child support, but didn't think about that while plowing the insanity into the mattress ... 'tards, the whole lot of ya!

News here said that he's not eligible for the payout until the backpayment is paid in full.

If I were in his shoes, here is what I would do:

1) Talk to a well-respected family-court lawyer and secure his services for future payment2) Talk to anybody that could loan me $29k immediately with a promise for future payment3) Pay the back-support payments4) Have lawyer prove to the lottery that the debt has been paid in full.5) Have lawyer file for full custody of all 5 kids6) Receive lump sum payment of lottery winnings7) Buy a house large enough to house all 5 kids in a neighborhood with a great school system8) Hire a well-respected financial planner/investment manager

SearchN:tylerdurden217: xanadian: Ya know, it's funny when someone immediately jumps to the conclusion that just because he's a dude and owes child support that he must be a bad person.

Either submitter is trolling or is a woman.

Please describe a scenario in which a person avoids paying child support for years and is still a good person.

Easy enough.

A friend of mine met a woman. Went on a few dates, did the sexual thing with her, and then found out she was married. He dumped her immediately.

Few years goes by, and a man shows up at his door with a notice saying he needs to take a paternity test. He then finds out he has a 3 year old. During that time, he didn't know he had a child, but due to the test showing a match, he now owes back child support.

If somebody that deceptive and hateful did that to me, I would show up at her door. With a handgun and one bullet. And blow my own goddamn brains out all over her living room rug while she watched.

Why not? Something like that happens to you, and you live in a country with as screwed-up a family court system as ours, your life is over. Done. Finished. You don't get to even have an opinion about what's been ordered against you, let alone be allowed to argue your case. It's already been decided. It's the man's fault, the woman is always totally 100% honest, there are no mistakes anywhere, and anybody who even tries to defend himself is immediately and forever a despicable deadbeat dad. Go home, you lose, hand over all your money for the rest of your life.

Some godawful lying slut effectively ends my life, there's no reason to not just end it more quickly. If she has recurring nightmares about it, at least some kind of justice will have been served.

So, I owe, on paper, a metric arseload of back spousal support. No matter that the ex is getting 56% of my net income. What she *wants* amounts to 70% of my net income, and I just simply can't afford that and continue to live in a building, rather than a cardboard box.

The amount she *wants* is based on a legal and financial fiction. It was calculated based on my earnings from a job I no longer had when we split up--right at the time the economy was going south, and Nortel laid me off.

So, now, I have a job that pays me 50% less than I was making at Nortel, and I can't afford a lawyer to get things legally reduced, and she's indicated that she won't agree to that. I can't qualify for legal aid, because, well, I'm working. But I totally, utterly, don't have the cash-flow to support a $3K visit or two to court. So, I'm stuck "underpaying" my support every month, with the notional arrears mounting up.

Am I a deadbeat dad as a result? I don't think so. My ex gets more of my money than I do, and I'm servicing the communal debt while she sits on her fat ass and refuses to work. But if you looked at the amounts I owe in back spousal support, it could easily qualify for the kind of "shocking headline" we have before us. And in no way, shape, or form, am I a deadbeat dad or deadbeat ex husband.

vudukungfu:Mugato: Maybe guys should be a little more cautious about where they put their dick.

100% this.

I'd go along with that if I didn't know that women change their minds... you know, as it is their prerogative to do so. Say in the unlikely case that one who is cautious about where he deposits his sperm, and the willing recipient agrees that he is great dad material - then suddenly, out of the blue, she decides she is no longer happy and BAM... you got pwned by family court. Caution has nothing at all to do with any of it.

The common practice is for whores to marry a foolish man, bear a few miserable brats, sue for divorce and child support, and then begin a downward spiral of serial monogamy and loose alliances until the meal tickets come of age and the money stops.

An especially crafty whore can start the first round of leeching at 18 to 20 years old, and still be able to repeat the exercise with a new fallguy at the end of her practical childbearing years -- around 38 to 40 years old.

knew a guy once that had several kids by several women, and he was working as a cabbie so that he could make money under the table. Speaking as someone who may not have the ability to have kids(not for lack of trying, though), this man looks so happy, though he should have had the money in check form at the mother's house, on one knee, begging forgiveness. Any child I may father would be the light of my life. This dirt bag cabbie was shirking his duty so he could buy lotto tickets and booze. It is a long and painful time, is parenting. Can't handle it? It's a $2 condom. You don't deserve to be the biological father with actions like his. Neither does the lotto winner. Give it to someone who can regulate their bodily functions a little better.

/here I thought subby was going somewhere else with the headline.//chances are good that we hear about this moron in the news///dead with his wife pointing to a string of mistresses as the cause of her temporary insanity

I had a deadbeat dad. I resented him like hell as a kid, but now that I'm older I genuinely appreciate everything he didn't do for me. I've got a son of my own now who will be one month old tomorrow. Nothing makes you realize the importance of being a good dad like not having one yourself. I'm looking forward to doing all the things with him that I never got to do with my dad.

Most people who win the lottery have something going against them. If they have no criminal or legal foibles, they generally fall into one of two categories: gambling addicts or greedy excess spenders with too much money already, but think they need more for some idiotic reason. I highly doubt this man fell into the latter category (though clearly he has legal financial trouble), considering nearly everywhere a person who has a job will be required to, eventually, pay child support unless he goes from job to job and literally either makes nothing or is paid under the table.

So, yeah, now this man will not only EASILY be able to pay off his debts, but his child will be taken care of.

Here comes the part where, because this is the US, someone will now say that a) his child support should be increased to a million bucks a year, and/or b) the mother of said child deserves some of this lottery windfall because she had to deal with the financial pain and suffering of not receiving his money, while simultaneously, if her luck is down and out, receiving literally every single legal allowable financial government benefit under the sun, assuming the child is under 18.

/most people don't argue in favor of the final paragraph above//my experience is from that of the child going through the divorce, though an older teenager, so some of the above has applied to me///dad should have been out on his ass, not mom

Maybe, but if he has no money and didn't move for a reduction then he has no one but himself to blame. And of course if he has no money through his own fault, then that's no excuse.

LOL, it's just that easy. File some paperwork, and you're golden.

/Not really. Mine took two years, all the while racking up the difference between what I could pay, and what the old order said//In a lot of states, the CP's attorney can delay the hearing for months at a time, just because///Family court sucks

highendmighty:Lando Lincoln: On the plus side, he can now pay that. So that's good.

This. in spades. And if he likes his kid(s) (dnrtfa), he can more than make up for it.

and this, too:sammyk: Slaxl: what_now: sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

Perhaps he doesn't have any money?

I wonder if maybe there was some sort of economic factor beyond his control. Something like a worldwide recession and unprecedented high unemployment.

I paid child support. I paid child support that was based upon a gross income figure that I never even approached in real life (did you know un-exercised stock options count as income?) and as a result of the crushing sum of money that was deducted from my check every week I couldn't even afford to hire a lawyer to have it reduced. I paid the damn support though, because that's what I was legally required to do regardless of how looney the accounting by the Texas AG's office was.

If this guy owes child support back to 2009, hasn't paid ANY of it and is out buying Powerball tickets he is a bad person. Period. With any luck they just garnish his unpaid amount from his winnings so at least his kid will see some money before this newly minted millionaire gets back about the very serious business of shirking his responsibilities in a much nicer car.

I've found that guys with 5 kids who owe several years of back child support and buy lottery tickets are generally pretty responsible, so lets not jump to conclusions. Spending $2 on a powerball ticket instead of a condom doesn't make him bad, it makes him an American hero. BACK OFF.